Unprofessional behaviour of junior doctors: a retrospective analysis of outcomes by the Singapore Medical Council disciplinary tribunals

Abstract

INTRODUCTION This is a retrospective analysis of outcomes by Singapore Medical Council (SMC) disciplinary tribunals in cases involving junior doctors. We aimed to classify the types of unprofessional behaviour and consider appropriate measures for remediation and prevention. METHODS SMC’s annual reports from 1979 to 2017 and published grounds of decision from 2008 to 2017 were examined using two screening levels to identify cases involving junior doctors. Cases were sorted into five outcome categories: (a) professional misconduct; (b) fraud and dishonesty; (c) defect in character; (d) disrepute to the profession; and (e) acquitted. RESULTS A total of 317 cases were identified, of which 13 (4.1%) involved junior doctors: 4 (30.8%) cases involved professional misconduct, 4 (30.8%) cases involved fraud and dishonesty, 3 (23.1%) cases saw an acquittal, and one case each involved defect in character and disrepute to the profession. The four cases of professional misconduct highlight the need to differentiate medical errors due to systems factors from those due to individual culpability, by applying analytical tools such as root cause analysis and Unsafe Act Algorithms. Disciplining the individual alone does not help prevent the recurrence of similar medical errors. We found that fraud and dishonesty was an important category of unprofessional behaviour among junior doctors. CONCLUSION While the frequency of unprofessional behaviour among junior doctors, as determined by the SMC disciplinary tribunal, is low (4.1%), this study highlights that complaints against medical doctors often involve systems issues and individual factors. Unprofessional behaviours related to fraud and dishonesty need special attention in medical school.